Why on earth would I vote for Trump when he said in the debates he wants to take the guns from "criminals" and...

Why on earth would I vote for Trump when he said in the debates he wants to take the guns from "criminals" and "terrorists?" He's a gun grabber liberal now.

This is what I can't get my head around in this election. One one hand, you've got an incompetent, narcissistic, xenophobe who knows nothing about politics. He has proposed a giant wall on the Mexican border, banning Muslims from entering the country, breaking the Geneva convention to torture and kill civilians, and extensive use of stop-and-frisk. He has insulted a reporter for his disability and said that a Latino judge couldn't be trusted. He's proud of his tax-dodging and bribery of politicians. He lies on automatic, even when it doesn't make sense, even when it doesn't benefit him.

On the other hand, you've got business as usual: a standard politician. Continuing Obama's steady (albeit slow) progress in the right direction. A bit on the robotic side, not too inspiring, no sweeping changes. Dubious morals, which beats Trump's obviously horrendous morals. She's nobody's ideal candidate, but in terms of policy (if not character) she's not bad.

>clinton takes guns from everyone
>trump takes guns only from criminals
wow i disagree with both so might as well vote for the one i least agree with xD

I think he simply meant that those with a severe criminal record shouldn't have access to guns, which makes sense desu.

>right direction
where do you think you are Nigger
Shill CTR GTFO

Thank you for correcting the record.

>trump takes guns only from criminals

2nd amendment doesn't ban criminals from owning guns.

Trump utterly destroyed her.

He talked about real plans and policy and Clinton just talked about Trump.

He had her on the ropes the whole times. All she could do was arrogantly smirk while she was losing. It was embarrassing for her and for the Democratic party.

Almost all the polls except for LOL (((CNN))) agree.

Trump dominated.

Wacht maar, Geert krijgt je wel te pakken!

Trump utterly destroyed her.

He talked about real plans and policy and Clinton just talked about Trump.

He had her on the ropes the whole times. All she could do was arrogantly smirk while she was losing. It was embarrassing for her and for the Democratic party.

Almost all the polls except for LOL (((CNN))) agree.

Trump dominated.

Criminals deserve zero amendments

If Hillary or Obama had said this exact thing, the conservative media would be all over them. Looking forward to a full day of wingnut radio where they try to prop this clown up after last night

>Criminals deserve zero amendments

Wow sounds like you are a good little anti-constitution fascist. I guess you love Obama and Bush right?

The infringement of someone else's rights should be the forfeiture of one's own rights desu

No but other statutes do.

>No but other statutes do.

Constitution trumps statutes you dumb faggot.

>The infringement of someone else's rights should be the forfeiture of one's own rights desu

Sorry but where is that in the Constitution? NRA has sold out endorsing this RINO.

>implying I ever said it's in the constitution
Where did you learn to read?

>He has proposed a giant wall on the Mexican border
Which is a fine plan and there's absolutely no reason not to secure our borders.

>banning Muslims from entering the country
UNTIL we improve our ability to screen for potential terrorists. This is also a fine plan, given that we're effectively at war with Islam on a global scale and terrorists have demonstrated a willingness and ability to carry out violent acts in virtually any country they like. I don't have to give you examples of recent European terror attacks, do I?

>breaking the Geneva convention to torture and kill civilians
The Geneva convention specifies that it applies only to countries that have ratified its terms. It even goes so far as to state that it applies to countries that haven't formally ratified it but "accept and apply the provisions" of the Conventions.

What this means in practice is that if we're fighting stateless Muslims who frequently make videos where they torture people to death, we're not required to uphold any of the Geneva Conventions against them, according to the rules of the Convention itself. Following a set of rules intended to make war slightly more humane when the opposing side has already proven their intent to ignore said rules is doing nothing but handicapping us.

>and extensive use of stop-and-frisk.
Nothing wrong with this either - the only criticism of stop and frisk is literally "das rayciss".

>He has insulted a reporter for his disability
Even if he did, which is debatable, is this really an issue?

>and said that a Latino judge couldn't be trusted.
A Latino judge who is a member of the Mexican equivalent of the KKK. That's bias, whether you like it or not.


On the other hand, Clinton is the poster child for corrupt, evil politicians who will say anything to get elected. She was kicked off the Watergate investigations for being unethical and she thinks that getting child rapists set free on technicalities is something to laugh about.

He is right though. Why should one give a crack nigger that's already proven to be mentally unstable a military assault rifle?

Because MUH AMMENDIMENTS!!! HURR DURR

Kanker een eind op, Hassan

This is what I can't get my head around. A fucking non-American thinking his opinion matters about US President. Why don't you slip on your nicest pair of clogs and fuck off to go rip an epic hit from a fat doobie, you worthless cuck?

If you're not a criminal or terrorist, then you should have nothing to worry about.

>Why should one give a crack nigger that's already proven to be mentally unstable a military assault rifle?

Sorry I didn't know the 2nd amendment only applied to white people. Where does it say that in the Constitution? Freedom is freedom for everyone. Sorry you live in a Stalinist Euroshit country without guns.

I also would not give a mentally unstable crack whiteboy an assault rifle you complete piece of shit retard mongoloid idiot.

That's because he is mentally unstable and could easily shoot up other people with it.

God you burgers are so goddamn fuckin retarded.

you do know that by committing a federal crime your rights are taken away?

"Criminals" meaning people who committed felonies who already are not allowed to own guns legally. "Terrorists" hopefully meaning Muslims who don't belong in the US anyway.

1. Clinton is worse and wants everyone to lose their guns
2. Trump has talked about it with NRA, he doesn't want people arbitrarily put on some list and lose their guns for it, there would be extensive safety measures to stop abuse

>you've got business as usual: a standard politician. Continuing Obama's steady (albeit slow) progress in the right direction. A bit on the robotic side, not too inspiring, no sweeping changes. Dubious morals, which beats Trump's obviously horrendous morals. She's nobody's ideal candidate, but in terms of policy (if not character) she's not bad.
If you truly think that describes her you obviously don't pay attention. Hillary is a criminal, she let Americans die, committed massive fraud, led to save her own ass unrepentant, committed treason by both exposing classified material and allowing Russia to secure American Uranium supplies. At least 47 of her "friends" and acquaintances died under mysterious causes after having falling outs with her or agreeing to turn states evidence on her. Including 12 of her personal body guards. All these "progressive policies she is pushing are what has divided the nation. We are on the brink of destruction because of the liberal forced tolerance agenda. You cannot force tolerance nor can you demand respect you have not earned. Any attempt to do so breeds hatred and division.

>you do know that by committing a federal crime your rights are taken away?

Sorry but please point that out in the US Constitution.